G.R. No. 107725 January 22, 1998
ESPERO SALAO, petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and JOWIE APOLONIO, respondents.

FACTS

This case originated from a complaint for damages filed by private respondent Jowie Apolonio against petitioner Espero Salao for head injuries allegedly inflicted on August 24, 1986. Apolonio testified that upon entering Salao’s compound to join a friend, Salao drove him away, called him a drug addict, hit him on the head with a gun, and threatened him. The intervention of Apolonio’s brother and Salao’s mother prevented further injury. Apolonio presented evidence of hospitalization and surgery for a fractured skull. His brother corroborated the account. Salao claimed self-defense, alleging Apolonio assaulted him first after resenting an order to stop drinking. The trial court found Apolonio’s version more credible, awarded damages, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Petitioner appealed, questioning the award of damages and attorney’s fees, and later raised his acquittal in a related criminal case as an additional ground.

ISSUE

1. Whether petitioner can raise new issues on appeal regarding the award of damages and the effect of his acquittal in the criminal case.
2. Whether the awards of actual damages, moral damages, and attorney’s fees are supported by evidence and law.
3. Whether petitioner’s acquittal in the criminal case for serious physical injuries extinguishes his civil liability for damages in this separate civil action.

RULING

1. No. Issues not raised in the lower courts, such as the propriety of the damage awards and the effect of acquittal, cannot be raised for the first time on appeal without violating fair play, justice, and due process. Petitioner’s appeal to the Court of Appeals only questioned the lack of conciliation under PD 1508 and the denial of his motion for reconsideration/new trial.
2. Yes. The award of P20,000.00 in actual damages is based on properly identified hospital bills and receipts. The award of P10,000.00 in moral damages is appropriate under Article 2219(1) or (2) of the Civil Code, as the case involves physical injuries from a quasi-delict, and the amount serves to alleviate moral suffering, not to enrich the injured party. The award of P15,000.00 in attorney’s fees is justified under Article 2208(2) of the Civil Code, as the defendant’s act compelled the plaintiff to litigate and incur expenses, a finding expressed by the trial court.
3. No. Petitioner’s acquittal in the criminal case does not extinguish his civil liability in this separate civil action for damages based on quasi-delict. The civil liability referred to in Rule 111, §2(b) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure is civil liability arising from crime (ex delicto). This case is a civil action for quasi-delict under Article 33 of the Civil Code, which proceeds independently of the criminal prosecution and requires only a preponderance of evidence. An acquittal, especially one where not all witnesses from the civil case may have been presented in the criminal prosecution, is not conclusive of liability in the separate civil action.